I just bought a rifle which came with a Pecar 4-10X variable on it. I've never been too big a fan of European riflescopes (although their optics are usually first rate), but this scope seems to be quite adaptable to actual hunting use. It is a bit long (and heavy), as is to be expected with European designs, however not unreasonably so, and its tapered first focal plane crosshair remains fine enough at 10X that it doesn't look like it would obscure the target.

I know that Pecar has been out of business for a while, but that Pecar scopes are still sought by a number of knowledgeable shooters. What would fair market be on this scope in near perfect cosmetic condition?

Pecar scopes were very popular in Australia and (I think) the UK last century. Though I don't suppose they were up with Zeiss optically, they had a reputation for being very tough mechanically. The feature I liked most was the tactile movement of the knobs, not clicks but the feel of a spring-loaded ball falling into place - and this at a time when Zeiss adjustments lacked clicks at all and Nickel just used a sheet-metal spring against the the fluting of the knob.

Though dural tubes with rails held the European high ground when new, the old scopes with best resale value now are those with round steel barrels, innocent of any demi-rings soldered on. The reason for this, I surmise, is because these scopes may never have been stripped for that strange soldering practice and, being clean, lend themselves to re-use on a new rifle.

The shop near me would probably want $650 Australian for the scope you describe (c. $US500) but maybe Pecars are less sought after in America.

You will find English shops selling them on the Internet at high prices, too, and one I know of also sells the replacement reticles, in case the one you have doesn't suit.

They apparently even made replacement reticles for the image-movement Champion models, which I imagine would have be be connected to the erector tube somehow. Assuming the scope has been mounted properly, however, it is my belief that the older reticle-movement system was superior.

I test fired the rifle at the bench just yesterday. The Pecar reticle adjustments are crisp and accurate. The sight picture is very clear, and the tapered reticle is quite nice to use, although at 10X it does require a larger sighting square on the target than do my Leupolds. The reticle would be just fine for any game animal out to several hundred yards. Of course, with just 2.5 times difference in lowest and highest magnification, the reticle doesn't "grow" all that much at high power.

Except for the scope being rather long, and with a steel tube somewhat heavy, I think that after getting used to it I would find it a practical field hunting scope.

It sits on an extraordinarily nice Schultz & Larsen M60 which has been rechambered from the original 7x61 S&H to 7mm Rem. That is the only thing unoriginal about the rifle; the loss of the original chambering is a bit of a downer, but being able to shoot the rifle without spending lots of time and money either buying or making the scarce ammunition largely compensates for that.

Pecar scopes were considered among the better scopes of their day. In good condition, they still command good prices in Germany. Another worth noting is Hertel and Reuss.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Of course, with just 2.5 times difference in lowest and highest magnification, the reticle doesn't "grow" all that much at high power.

Feel smug, Stonecreek! Giving scopes zoom multiples of more than 3x apparently requires some sacrifice in optical engineering - I suspect that is usually stretching the erector scroll movement farther down the scope, which in modern terms would mean a longer, more vulnerable, erector tube rocking around under recoil.

Rather than wanting to discuss this matter in case of malfunctions, I imagine most makers would just repair without explanation or hand over a new scope.

I agree. There are some significant optical/mechanical trade-offs in achieving the (claimed) 6-times magnification variation of the latest generation of scopes. While I haven't tried using such a scope, I have to assume that latitude of eye position is somewhat compromised in order to allow such a large variation in magnification.

It may be that the problems involved in large multiples have something to do with Swaro's using four helical springs behind the erector tube in the Z5 and Z6 lines but staying with the old flat springs on the Z3s.

Further, I suspect the German fondness for putting scopes on double rifles dictated the placement of those springs - to cope with S/S rifles recoiling right on one shot and left on the next.